tv Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN January 25, 2013 1:00am-6:00am EST
will toss it to dr. scott. >> some of you know >> some of you know it is an important event. i told my staff that there will be no fighting in mali today. they looked at me and said, you have certainly become clairvoyant duri. today, not so good. mali and ghana play today. >> i want to make one night. turn on your microphone to speak. when you are finished, lee's turn it off duri. .- ways turn it off here an
>> thank you. ghana just played mali. thank you, general. likely question is mali was part of the counterterrorism program for the past eight years. as we can see, last year mali has had to gold problems. -- difficult problems. the program is designed to strengthen african militaries. it does not seem to have worked very well in mali. my question is, in the washington, you say you're going to expand to other african countries and train them t. why give medicine to more people than the one person who took it
certainly has not recovered? it could be argued that they are doing worse. when i bring africa to the u.s. ? i know a lot of africans are anxious about this. >> the question about mali is a fair question. the kernel probably has some more insight on this. we have had a u.s. training effort with the mali forces for some number of years. some of that has occurred in mali and some of it was mali officers coming to that u.s. for training. there were some who led the military coup, which overthrew the elected government. that is worrisome for us. we asked ourselves questions.
did we miss the signs that this was happening? was there anything that we did in our training that was -- that could have been done differently and caused a different outcome? i think that the answer is a little bit of both. as we look at this from a purely military standpoint, we were focusing our training almost exclusively on tactical or technical matters. how to operate various pieces of equipment and how to improve effectiveness or tactical operations and the like. i see that there kernel is a paratrooper. -- colonel is a paratrooper. all of those things are very good.
we did spend the requisite time focusing on values, ethics, and a military egos that says -- e cos that says when you put on aim u of the nation, you accept responsibility to defend and th protect that nation and abide by the legitimate authority that has been established duri an conductor sells to the rule of law and to see yourself as servants of people of the nation. we did not do that to the degree that we needed to, i think. i believe he focused exclusively on technical. -- i believe we focused exclusively on technical. there are other countries across the continent and across the globe where we have enduring
relationships where the military has performed admirably when the nation has been stressed. tunisia comes to mind as an example as a place where the military was under great pressure, but performed very effectively during the revolution. there is a lot to be learned from that. from the head quarters location , it was practical to be frank. the facilities were right there. it made sense to operate from germany where we are today in good facilities with good access to africa through the civilian air force that are in europe. it keeps us in generally the same time zones as our africa partners. it is a good location for us to
operate. there was early on consideration of the command headquarters relocated somewhere in africa. we are no longer considering that. where we are is the right place to be. >> back there. >> general, there were conflicts in the north. i'm not sure the united states has [indiscernible] >> thank you. great question. first and foremost, we recognize that it is not only the u.s., it is not our
responsibility do just that, not the primary people. that must reside with the nigerian government. it we tried to take the lead, we would not get it right. we do not understand the context. we are americans and not nigerians. it would be difficult for us to be effective. our focus has been working through our u.s. ambassador with the nigerians to say, what can we do to help you? we think that is the right approach. we have an ongoing dialogue with the nigerian officials on what types of support might be helpful. for my comment about mali, there are numerous nigerian officers and noncommissioned officers who trained with us for a year
in the united states and other programs across europe. we think that is a good endeavor. we are talking with the nigerians. they made some specific request to help them. some of the lessons that we have learned in iraq and afghanistan in countering improvised explosive devices, how do you consider that weapon as being used increasingly by some groups, there are some procedures and technology that we might be able to assist with. on a more mundane level, things like equipment and helping nigeria got there, the military aircraft to a state where they can operate routinely and reliably, that peace was important as well. -- piece was important as well. let me take this opportunity to
commend nigeria for offering the force commander for that support mission for mali. there will be a nigerian contingent. i think that is a great effort by the great country of nigeria. >> the young woman there in the second row. >> hi. how are you? hi, general. in.name is robert an i want to follow up on mali and ask a strategic question. what would be the end game in mali? is it containment? i also wanted to have an idea on the strategic level what we see
as the end game or the exit strategy? is it only containment? or is it eliminating all of the jihad this ists in the region? >> thank you. let me start by saying in mali, we give this not as a single interrelatedlem, but problems. we have had the opportunity to travel together throughout the region and talk about this. first, the restoration of constitutional government as a necessary precondition for it to be satisfactory. second, addressing the concerns of a largely disaffected population in the northern
portion of the country. third, as you mentioned, the existing in northern mali of a qaeda and other terrorist and extremist organizations that undermine the rule of law in that portion of the country. that needs to be dealt with. fourth, is a problem that does not get much attention. in the long run, it might be the most vocal to address. that is that the that humanitarian assistance conditions across. -- bad humanitarian assistance conditions across. it makes the increasingly complex. with that in mind, we think that the right thing needs to be legitimate government. the ability for the government to extend its reach into all
portions of the country. that is nonnegotiable. note discussion of a separatist state or something -- no discussion of a separatist state or something like that. mali will need some help to establish government control in the north. realistically, we would all like to see the elimination of al qaeda and others from northern mali. realistically, probably the best you can get is a containment. that way al qaeda is no longer able to control territory as they do today and no longer to control the lives of the population centers, particularly in the three main cities. those have to be freed and restored under mali control. i think that is what i would see as the end stake.
i think others in the african union see that as well. last point, we very clearly see this from the u.s. government side that this must be an in perception and african led endeavor that is done at the request of the mali government. i think that is well underway now. >> right there. >> hello, general. my name is emmanuelle. this is currently a topic i have done over in class. i'm sure you have heard the rumors and concerned about able saying how we got involved in libya and all of the intervention that we did. butle said we had regionasons,
some are wondering why we are doing the same in syria. from what i have gathered, it is about fears about accidentally had.ng veggie hothe ji i'm sorry. arming the jihad. i cannot really remember the question. i'm sorry. >> that's ok. i think i have enough to go on. thank you. i think we will have a chance to talk a little bit later. graduate myself, thank you for serving. this is pretty important.
this is a fair topic to talk about. we have to put it into context and remember how things in libya began. go back to march of 2011. that is easier for us. it might seem like a long time ago. in that situation, you had the city of benghazi. you had the libyan army poised on the outskirts of that town. we had language coming from a leader of libya, words like, " we will hunt them down like rats. we will exterminate them like vermin." africa and the world have heard these words before. with very harsh consequences. the united nations made a decision, our president made a decision, a decision that said
we will not stand for that. we will not let his army go in -- let this army go in and kill innocents in the city of benghazi. we took military action to prevent that. remember how it started. the mission was to protect civilian populations. it was not to take sides. it was not not to support the revolution. it was to protect the civilians. after a while, nato took the mission into something different. it is important to remember how it started. it is a fair question to say -- why did you act in libya in this circumstance under the doctrine, if you will, under the principle, if you will, of the responsibility do protect noncombatants?
why did you choose to do that in libya and not choose to do that in other places? each circumstance is significantly different. it has to be measured on its own merit. it also addresses the limits of power. military power does not solve all problems. there was a un security council resolution that called for its mission and authorized all available means. in syria, there is no such security council resolution that would provide the legal underpinnings for an operation in syria similar to what was conducted in libya. great question, but there are significant differences. syria is not in my region. i am a long, long way from being a syrian expert.
that is how i kind of see the difference. >> thank you, dr. scott. general. on the president of it organize nation called a constituency for africa. we work on public policy here in the united states to build support for africa. my father always told me i should support my country. rather than go to vietnam, i opted for the peace corps. having said that, there are a lot of people who have a conception. the bulk of the people in the public domain do not feel that africacom is --they are saying that the real googgoal is not necessarily security. we see the drone allah see in
africa -- we see the donor policy in africa. -- drone policy in africa. one question is -- how do you measure success? how do you say you have succeeded in your mission? informed bothom in the united states and in africa? how do you engage? in efforts to promote security in africa? >> great question. i will say that maybe i'm usual for a guy in a uniform, but i'm a huge supporter of the peace corps. they are still looking for volunteers. if you want to come back, there are lots who are coming back. there are a lot of peace corps volunteers who serve as a young people.
they did their service and went on and had successful careers and doing whatever it is that we were doing and they are now coming back for a second tour that is greatly appreciated. especially by the ambassadors. having a seasoned and experienced his core volunteer come back is hugely beneficial. thank you for choosing to serve. also remember that in africa and other parts of the world, for many people, the only americans they will meet is a peace corps volunteer. it is a very powerful program. i get asked a lot -- what about the militarization of u.s. foreign policy? is africacom a guys to allow the into africa?
is it really did get a presence on the continent? the state department of usa la st fiscal year spent between eight or $9 billion in africa. the department of defense spent a little more than $500 million. that is the dollar comparison in terms of what the level of the effort is. overwhelmingly, the u.s. government support in african countries. today category of healthcare, education, and agriculture. security is a very minor part, but an important part, but a very minor part.
i think that is probably as it should be. the defense strategic guidance that i referred to in my opening comment tells me that in africa, we are to seek a light footprint and innovative approaches and low costs approaches to achieving the united states security objective. we have one base in africa. we have about 2000 people. it supports not only u.s. africa command, but u.s. central command and the transportation command as well. that is our residence on the continent. -- that is our presence on the continent.
there are 100 personnel who are supporting africans in the effort to joseph kony and his senior lieutenants to justice. they are indicted by the international criminal court. there is a u.s. log that tells us to do that -- u.s. law that tells us to do that. if there is a law that tells us to do that, we go and do that. and it is important part of the consideration. as i mentioned, i have been to or need to of the different countries. -- i have been to 42 other different countries. there is always a senior american and it is never mean. it is always an ambassador. -- thereit is never mea is always a senior american and it is never me. it is always an ambassador.
there is a consultation and support on the chief of the mission and that particular country. that chief of mission, the ambassador is our presence in that country. is to support that ambassador in the attainment of his or her objectives. the one success story -- and i think this is an important one -- the african union mission in somalia. if you told me a year ago that somalia would have an elected president of parliament that -- would be free of al shabaab, i would have told you you were crazy. but it has happened. the african countries under african union leadership
collectively made a determination that that is what they were going to do. privilege to beuche-- invited to a very small meeting. they have been directed by their presidents to say you guys developed the military strategy to defeat al shabaab. it was a fascinating conversation. it is only the principles in the room. no big staffs. just them. there was heated debate and lots of different views. i did not say a word. they came to the conclusion that this is how they wanted to do this. here is what we need from you. it was a great model to me. it was african society of saying, this is what we want to do.
we need a little bit of help. i needed some training, funding, and equipping from the united states -- they needed training, funding, and a clipping the united states and others. i think that is -- and equipping from the united states and others. our secretary of state formally announced a recognition of that the government. this was inconceivable just a few years ago. again, that is where we are at our best. not necessary leading, but training, supporting, and helping in ways that the africans ask us to help. that is what we do best. >> good afternoon. and with the institute for policy studies.
bunche to applaud the center for this event. thank you for your vision. commander ham, there are so many areas that i want to question. i guess at the center of it, when you talk about the state department giving aid of about $8 billion are $9 billion, it seems a bit disingenuous. the state department covers funds for private military contractors that many would think are covered by the department of defense. it seems disingenuous to put it in that way that the state department is dominating what
many of us are truly concerned that the department of defense is having much too sway in terms of foreign policy, especially in africa. the topic on the agenda is jobs. it is the economic livelihood for young people who are graduating and do not see any prospects for jobs. there is concern for the u.s. and their foreign-policy issue thing to emphasize more military use as a means to security when many see jobs and a stable economy as a means to security and stability. i think the concerns are many. the concerns are around africa com in 2008 at a time when africa surpassed the middle east in its supply of oil to the united states and the concern
of the u.s. of africa and oil and a vital resource is the true rationale for africacom, as well as countering china in that theater where china is increasing its influence. the concern was heightened before africacom was heightened. concern has grown over time. is there any effort to evaluate africacom? i understand your stepping down as a new commander steps in. there has been a congressional hearing on benghazi, but clearly there is a bigger issue at stake and that is u.s. foreign-policy with regards to africa. thank you. >> thank you. it will not surprise you that i disagree with most of what you said, which is ok here k. we live in a country where you can do that. it is true that the state
department has the authority for security assistance matters. some of that 8-9,000,000,000 dollars that is spent in africa does in fact go to security assistance programs. let us be wildly extravagant and say that it is $1 billion. that still leaves $7 billion-$8 billion that is nonmilitary activities. again, mostly healthcare, education, and agriculture. that is where the u.s. sent its money in that effort. they are good reasons in my view. the one point where i could not agree with you more is about how to establish security in any place?
the way i would characterize it is that the military is an essential, but not decisive proponent of establishing security and stability in any particular region. let us fix amalia for example. -- let us take somalia for example. i was a necessity that was determined by the african union -- there was a necessity that was determined by the african union to dislodge that al qaeda element. it is a central. -- it is essential. the military defeat of al shabaab will not in and of itself bring security and stability to somalia. that will come with good governance and economic development, education, and
healthcare. nonmilitary programs that would be contributing to the underlying factors to bring lasting security and stability. it is my view -- and you and others can disagree -- but i do not think that you can have the ability to extend good governance or extend the opportunity for economic development for good education systems if you have an extremist organization suppressing those opportunities in a particular society. again, i try to be realistic about things. i think a military component is essential, but not decisive. let me talk a minute about china. you raised an issue. china is in most places in
africa. they have chosen a different path than the united states. the chinese invest heavily in infrastructure. it is hard not to go to an african country and not see a chinese airport or road our government buildings or football stadiums. the chinese are very good at that. they built the african union headquarters. they built the national defense college. they have done a lot of good work. if chosen a path to invest in infrastructure. the united states have chosen a different path. we will invest in human capital. we invest in the people of
africa and not so much in the offf of africa -- sntuff africa. i think that is a good choice. someone pointed out to me that one of the people from the host nations said, do you see that football stadium? the chinese built that for us. how can the united states does not build stuff like that? my response to that was, the fact that there are people whose help allows them to fill the stadium is thanks to the people of the united states of america. the ambassador would probably yell at me if i said that. it points out a different approach. militarily, we are absolutely not in an adversarial relationship at all with china in africa. economic competitors,
absolutely. that is a situation between the united states and china, part of what plays out in china. certainly not adversaries. i meet with officials from china as i am moving around in africa. it is not a particularly close relationship, but not an adversary relationship either. i think there are great interactions with the chinese across the continent. one last point with regard to how people sense, how people feel about africa, we spend a fair amount of effort making sure that we understand that as best as we can. i would characterize it this way -- i have yet to go to an african country where the head of the state or the prime
minister or a minister of or in affairs or a minister of defense or a chief of defense or a member of parliament has ever said to me,, thank you for coming, but we do not need to have any more interactions with you. that has not happened to me. there were a couple of places where a couple of countries where there is not a great relationship with the united states. but what i have found in africa is an appreciation, an understanding of what we are trying to do. what we try to do is support it with our u.s. ambassador and be supportive of that african country. one of the beauties of being an american in africa is that we do
not have a colonial history. that helps us, frankly. we are who we are. there are no hidden agendas. it is not in our constitutional makeup. we are kind of who we are. what you see is what you get. i find that we have been welcome in some places more than others, but it is a pretty good relationship. it is not without its warts or faults, but it is a good relationship. if you ask the african leaders, do you want africacom? i think most of them would probably say, yeah. >> i think we have time for one final question. i will allow a professor to ask. -- is asking about what
africa partnership station has done some good, but i'm not sure if it is going. we were funded through this program to look at it, but not from -- a hazards perspective. we had two workshops in west africa where we did some training of oceanographers and forecasters. students worked with us. we develop some operational capacity for hazards and coastal areas. those turned into real time daily forecast for fishermen and others. there was a line of collaboration from 19 different countries i think that took part in that. is the program finished?
is it still going? anda professor of physics regional climate change in africa. >> thank you, africa. yes, the station remains an important part of our overall portfolio. with the thrust being to improve capacity and the capabilities maritime abilities. it is a multifaceted. we have not had -- we have not been able to have all of the year. -- u.s. personnel be would like to have because of impeding demands, but it is still an ongoing program. i take the opportunity to highlight a couple of things.
on both coasts of africa, we have been able to help african countries establish a series of maritime radars so that they can track and monitor commercial traffic that is operating in their territorial waters or exclusive economic zones. that is important from a hazards prevention standpoint, but also for enforcement and also in helping african law enforcement address a growing narcotics problem coming mostly from central and south america into ports of south africa. in the gulf of guinea, a notable program, the first that anyone is aware of of a truly
effective partnership between two of the african union's regional economic communities. the gulf of guinea, as you all know, rest on the boundaries between the economic community of west african states and the economic community of central african states. the number of workshops that were mentioned, mostly legalistic matters to help those two region organizations craft and share arrangements that have allowed for the nations to share law enforcement information and to allow for the pursuit of criminals across the borders, whether it is illegal fishery in or other illegal activities. still a lot of work to do in the domain of maritime security, but progress is being made.
that challenge, of course, is that operations in the maritime domain are the most expensive. ships and patrol crafts are expensive to procure and to maintain. the radars are very expensive. it is a tough thing to work through this. working with a number of u.s. government agencies, as well as other nations that are willing to contribute to help the maritime on both coasts establish a security that they need. it is alive and well. not quite alive and well as i would want it to be, i would like to have more presence. with that, let me say thank you
all for making time this afternoon. it has been these past two years an extraordinary journey. i started not knowing much about africa. i met a point now where i can comfortably say that i'm beginning to understand how much i do not know about africa. just when you think you understand the complexity of a challenge, another layer of complexity is revealed. but the u.s. relationship with african countries is important. it isn't growing in importance. the military component is -- it is growing in importance. thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]
general rodriguez. president obama also nominated mary jo white as the next chairman of the sec. he we nominated richard cordray -- re-nomicnated richard cordra. >> good afternoon, everybody. over the last four years, i've talked about how shared prosperity from wall street to main street depends on regulation to protect americans from the irresponsible actions of a few. that is why we have passed
tougher reforms to protect our financial system from the abuse that nearly brought the economy to its knees. today there are rules to help responsible families buy a home or send their child to college without worrying about being tricked out of their life savings. there are rules to make sure that financial firms that do the right thing are not undermined by those that don't do the right thing. and there are rules to end taxpayer-funded wall street bailouts once and for all. but it is not enough to change the law. we need cops on the beat to enforce the law. that is why today i am nominating mary jo white to lead the securities and exchange commission and renominating richard cordray for the consumer financial protection bureau could this guy is bothering me here. as a young girl, mary jo white was a big fan of the hardy boys. i was, too, by the way. as an adult, she had a career the hardy boys could only dream of. she brought down john gotti, and she brought down the terrorists
responsible for bombing the world trade center and the embassies and africa. that is a pretty good run. you don't want to mess with mary jo. mary jo does not intimidate easily, and that is important because she has a big job ahead of her. there is much more work to be done to complete the task of making sure that investors are better informed and better protected going forward. and we need to keep going after irresponsible behavior in the financial industry so that taxpayers don't pay the price. i am absolutely confident that mary jo has the confidence and resolve to tackle these issues in a way that is smart and fear, and i want to thank elisse
walter, who has done an outstanding job of holding down the fort is chairman, and i expect the senate to confirm mary jo as soon as possible so she can get to work. my next nominee is a familiar face could a year ago i nominated richard cordray to help give americans the information they need to make a sound financial crisis and protect them from unscrupulous lenders. nobody questioned richard's qualifications. but he was not allowed an up or down vote in the senate, and as a consequence, i took action to appoint him on my own. over the last year, richard has proved to be a champion of american consumers. thanks to his leadership, we have made it tougher for families to be tricked into
mortgages they cannot afford, we have set clear rules, we have launched a know before you go campaign so that students can make smart decisions about college, we have cracked down on credit card companies that charged in fees and forced the companies to make it right. through it all, richard has earned a reputation as a straight shooter and someone who is willing to bring every voice to the table to do what is right for consumers and our economy. richard's appointment runs out at the end on the year. he can stay on the job unless the senate did send the full point.-- give the vote. there is absolutely no excuse for the senate to wait any longer to confirm. i want to thank mary jo, richard, and their families for once again agreeing to serve. i would like them to say a few
words, starting with mary jo. >> give me my stand there. thank you, mr. president. for the confidence that you have placed in me and the face you have shown in me by nominating me to be the next chair of the securities and exchange commission. i am deeply, deeply honored. if confirmed by the senate, i look forward to committing all of my energies to working with the other commissioners and extremely talented and dedicated men and women of the staff of the sec, to fulfill the agencies mission to protect investors and ensure the strength, efficiency, and transparency of our capital markets. the sec, long a vital and positive force for our markets, has a lot of hard and important work ahead of it. i would welcome the opportunity to lead those efforts and build
on the work of chairman mary schapiro and chairman elisse walter, who i am very honored is present today. finally and most importantly, i want to thank my husband, who is here today on what is our 43rd wedding anniversary -- >> today? >> today -- for his strong support of me in seeking to engage this public service. thank you very much. >> thank you. richard. >> thank you, mr. president, for the confidence you have placed in me and the team at the consumer financial protection bureau. we understand that our mission is to stand on the side of consumers -- our mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters -- and see that they are treated fairly. for more than a year we are focused on making consumer finance markets work for the american people.
we approach this work with open minds, open ears, and great determination. we thank you and congress for the opportunity and the honor to serve our country in this important way. thank you. >> well, i just want to thank again mary jo and richard for their willingness to serve. these are people with proven track records, they will look out for the american people, american consumers, and make sure our marketplace works more transparently, more efficiently, more effectively. again, i would urge the senate to confirm both of them as quickly as possible, and i also want to express congratulations to the whites for their anniversary. if i had known, we would have, you know, maybe rolled out a cake or something. have fun. i hope you enjoy.
>> coming up on c-span, president obama's secretary of state choice. and leon panetta announced the ban lifted on women serving in combat. >> on the next "washington journal" biill kristol. then we look at the state of gay rights in the u.s. with kevin cathcart. and the ongoing affect the drought is having in the u.s.. less, your e-mails, phone calls, and tweets. >> personal finance started in
the 1930s with sylvia order. -- porter. the 1930s are known for everything from the hard economic times and you see alcoholics anonymous to getting rich to various social activist movements. fascism and communism both have a huge appeal. sylvia porter developed personal finance. our goal is to educate people so that the great depression will never happen again. it is an idea that we can teach people the skills and that if we learn these skills, we would all be ok. >> the dark side of the personal finance world with helaine olen. like us on facebook. >> secretary of state nominee,
john kerry, appeared before the senate foreign relations committee. during this three hour and 15 minute hearing, senator kerry spoke about this at amber benghazi attack and some of the foreign -- of the september benghazi attack. senator kerry also talked about the vietnam war. after returning from vietnam, he testified about his experience before this committee. john kerry is introduced by elizabeth warren, john mccain, and hillary clinton. a vote on his nomination by the full senate is expected next week.
come to order. let me, again, ask as i did yesterday, since the full senate has not yet passed the committee resolution sitting members, i ask unanimous consent the returning members to allow our prospective members to participate in today's hearing and if there is no objection, so ordered. let me start with saying you're not at the table yet, senator, but we're going to have you there shortly. wow. what a high priced staff member. let me say, senator kerry -- or should i say, mr. chairman, since you are still our committee's chair, that deeply humbled to preside over the committee today as we consider your nomination. asre honored to welcome you the president's nominee for a position you have most deservedly earned. from the first time you testified before chairman full bright as a young returning vietnam war hero in 1971 to the day the president nominated and announced your nomination as secretary of state. you may not be aware of it, but you will be the first member of
this panel to ascend directly to the position since senator john sherman of ohio became senator mckinley's secretary of state more than 100 years ago. so you are clearly making history once again. yours is a big chair to fill, and i will do my best today to live up to your example. i've watched your lead on the committee with an equally deep and abiding commitment to get to the heart of the matter. always probative, always ready for debate, always looking for the truth to answers, uncovering the facts, hearing all the evidence and then
publicly speaking truth to power based solely on what was the best interest of the nation. as a senator, as a member of this committee and as chairman, you have already built strong relationships with leaders around the world which will help you seamlessly into the role of secretary of state. you will need no introduction to the world's political and military leaders and will begin on day one fully conversed not only with the intricacies of u.s. policy but with the understanding of the nuance approach to necessarily interact on the multinational stage. when vice president biden sat on this chair, he said on more than one occasion, good international relationships are always predicated on strong interpersonal relationships. i think we can all agree that you have set the highest standard for developing those relationships throughout your career, and as secretary of state, you will continue to strengthen those relationships on behalf of the president and
the furtherance of american foreign policy. i'll have some questions later on policies and your views, including how you explain to world leaders how you could have been rooting for the boston red sox instead of what the world knows as the new york yankees as the team of the world, but let me say, mr. chairman, it's been a pleasure working with you and looking forward to continuing to work with you in the issues you've championed over the years. fighting global terrorism, preventing the spread of nuclear biological, chemical weapons, fighting for human rights and against hiv-aids around the world, fighting crime, corruption, drug trafficking and standing up, as you always have, for the interest of the foreign service around the world. in your role, should you will be confirmed, and i know you will, your portfolio will be greatly expanded, you will represent the interests of all of us, from securing our embassies and protecting our overseas personnel to promoting commerce, enhancing cross- cultural ties and keeping america secure through cooperation, where possible, and isolation where necessary as in the case of iran. and of course it goes without saying that you have truly been a world leader on one of the most consequential issues of our time -- climate change, and it heartens me to know that
someone with your commitment to the issue will be our voice to the world. the fact is whatever the challenges we will face in my view, the state department could not be in better hands. when it comes to america's role in world affairs, i know we agree that it is critical that the united states remain fully engaged, that we project not only the power of our military strength when necessary but the wisdom of our democratic ideals as we adjust to the new threats and new demands we will
inevitably face. there is no doubt you will be tested in your new role as secretary, nor is there any doubt that you will pass any tests with honors as you always have. before i recognize senator corker, let me thank you on behalf of the committee for all you have done through your long and illustrious career here in the senate and in the chairmanship of this committee and in anticipation of your confirmation by the full senate, i wish you good luck and god speed to many of the journeys that lie ahead and we look forward to having a close working relationship with you as the next secretary of state. let me now recognize senator corker, the ranking member, for his comments. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. i thank our three distinguished
guests who are going to introduce the chairman in just a minute. i want to say to the chairman, i want to thank you for your courtesy over the last six years as i've served on this committee. i look at you at being nominated for this as someone who's almost lived their entire life, if you will, for this moment of being able to serve in this capacity. there's no run in the united states senate that has spent more time than you have on issues of importance to our country. the experience you developed while being on this committee and spending time abroad with world leaders with your wife, who's at your side today, there's almost no one that spent that kind of time and effort.
so i'm happy for you. i know the many conversations we've had over the last two weeks, you're very anxious to serve. you're ready to go. my sense is your confirmation will go through very, very quickly. i do look forward to your testimony today. secretary clinton's here today, after a day of hearings both here and in the house, and i think you know you're inheriting a department that like many departments throughout government has numbers of challenges. we saw systemic issues that need to be addressed and they're in the process of being addressed right now. our nation has budgetary
constraints which means that in all of these departments creativity is going to have to be utilized to make sure we make the most of what we have in making sure that our u.s. interests are put forth. we have a world that is a dangerous world, and things continue to come over the area. sometimes at surprising times. i know as secretary of state, you are going to have to lead our country in addressing those as they come about. i do hope that you'll work closely with this committee, as you've work very closely with this committee over the last many years, in helping us work with you to make sure that as we move ahead we move ahead together and that it's seamless. we have many challenges, and i know on monday president obama said that america will remain the anchor of strong challenges in every corner of the globe. we will renew those institutions that extend our capacity to manage crises abroad for no one has a greater stake in a peaceful world than its most powerful nation. i could not agree more. i look forward to again hearing your testimony today about what
you hope to do in your new capacity, and i certainly welcome the three distinguished people who are here today to introduce you, which i know is a tremendous honor for you. thank you for your service. i look forward to your testimony. >> thank you, senator. we have a star-studded panel here to introduce the nominee. starting with -- i'll introduce you in order of your presentation, but i just want to start off by welcoming back the secretary, again, and we appreciate you coming back to us so soon and, again, you know, thanks from the committee and a grateful nation for your service to our country. and my understanding, although i'm being told differently, are you going -- senator warren -- senator warren, who is our new colleague, from the great state of massachusetts is going to be part of introducing her senior senator before the committee. then, secretary clinton, and our distinguished colleague, a member of this committee now as well, senator mccain. with that, senator warren. >> thank you. thank you, senator menendez. it's an honor to be here with secretary clinton and senator mccain to introduce my senior senator and my friend, senator john kerry. i have the privilege speaking for a man i know will continue in the tradition of john quincy adams and christian herder as great secretaries from the commonwealth of massachusetts. although john learned much about diplomacy overseas and in the senate, he would be the first to tell you that
massachusetts is also a great teacher of diplomatic skills, whether it was negotiating his way to make the ballot as long shot underdog in a five-way heavily contested state convention back in 1982, or the way he brought labor and management to the table, locked the parties in his senate office over a long weekend, brought in duncan doughnuts and negotiated an end to the 92-day long brockton nurses strike. if anyone wants to learn diplomacy, come to our massachusetts politics. john's story is well-known to all of us, as a youth of a son of a young foreign officer and learning about foreign policy at the dinner table each night to his service in combat in vietnam. less well-known is the story of his foreign policy work inside the senate. his 90 overseas trips that he made in 28 years on the foreign relations committee, his work with dick lugar to ensure free elections in the philippines, his work with bill frist on aids in africa, his work as chairman of the new start treaty and his very public and successful diplomatic interventions in afghanistan, pakistan and sudan. i think one day historians will
judge his senate years in temperatures terms of his impact on foreign policy much the same way so many recognize senator ted kennedy's impact on domestic policy. from his many years in the u.s. senate, john has developed a very personal understanding that we represent not just states or government but also people. i once asked john why he loves the senate. he said, it's the pride he feels in trying to get things done for people. for three years now, he's been working quietly to help a father from newton, massachusetts, colin bauer, whose two sons were kidnapped and taken to egypt. john even called former
president mubarak and had a screaming match with him about it. five times he's been to egypt since then and every time colin has been at the top of his list in every meeting. every senator here has a colin bauer. it's what we do. we fight for people back home. as secretary, john will understand that and bend over backwards to help us do that. he will be a terrific bridge from the hill to the administration. i know that john cares deeply about our country and our national security. i know he believes through and through in the good that america can do in the world because he's seen it and he's lived it all his life. from seeing the marshal plan in action with his father in post- world war ii europe, to volunteering to serve in the military and in traveling all these years as a senator. john says, america isn't exceptional because we say we are. we're exceptional because we do exceptional things. when the airplane, the one that says on the side, united states of america, lands anywhere in the world, i will be proud that it will be john kerry representing us. thank you. >> thank you, senator.
secretary clinton. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's very good to be back and to have this opportunity to join with senator warren and senator mccain in introducing president obama's nominee to be the next secretary of state. i was very honored when john asked me to take part in this because john is the right choice to carry forward the obama administration's foreign policy, and i urge his speedy confirmation. as we've heard from both the chairman and the ranking member and just now senator warren, he will bring a record of leadership and service that is exemplary. he has a view of the world that he has acted on.
first as that young returning veteran from vietnam who appeared before this committee, through the times that he served with such distinction as chairman. he's been a valued partner to this administration and to me personally. he has fought for our diplomats and development experts. he understands the value of investing in america's global leadership, and as we work to implement the accountability review board's recommendations, he's committed to doing whatever it takes to prevent another attack and protect our people and posts around the world. now, working together, we've achieved a great deal, but the state department and usaid have a lot of unfinished business from afghanistan to nonproliferation to climate change to so much.
we need to sustain our engagement in the asia pacific, continue ramping up economics as a tool to advancing america's interests and jobs, unleashing the potential's women and girls, keep championing the kind of smart power that looks to innovation and partnerships with governments and people alike to promote peace and stability. john has built strong relationships with leaders in governments here and around the world, and he has experience in representing our country in fragile and unpredictable circumstances. he was in pakistan and afghanistan a few years ago, and we were consulting over the phone. he played an instrumental role in working with president karzai, at the time, to accept the results of the election and to move forward. i had to call harry reid and ask harry not to schedule any votes so that john could
leading our diplomats and development experts is a great honor, and every day as i testified yesterday, i've seen firsthand their skill, their bravery, their unwavering commitment to our country. i've been proud to call them colleagues and serving as secretary of state. i know that john will continue the work of a lifetime on behalf of our country. thank you. >> thank you, madam secretary. senator mccain. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to be here with senator warren and secretary clinton to introduce and speak -- say a few words about my friend, senator kerry, to the committee. obviously the nominee doesn't need to be introduced to the committee on which he's served for over a quarter of a century. as the chairman for the last four years. so i can dispensed with the customary summary of his public service and qualifications for the office for which he's been nominated. they're well-known to you and to all of our colleagues. but i'd like to take a few moments to attest to the personal qualities that senator kerry would bring to the office of secretary of state, which i think are well suited to the position. he and i have been friends for quite a long time now. we've had our disagreements, which is unsurprising, given our political differences. and as often the case in our business, our friendship has been affected from time to time
by our enthusiasm for our differing views and by the competitive nature of politics. but the friendship has endured, i believe, it is based in mutual respect. some observers have attributed that respect to the fact that when we were much younger, nicer and better looking men than we are now, senator kerry and i spent some time at the navy's behest in a certain southeast asian country in less pleasant circumstances than we're accustomed to in the united states senate. ande i've always respected honored senator kerry's service in vietnam, my respect for john as a senator and my support for his nomination today originated in a very different experience. although that experience, too, concerned the country and the war he and i were privileged to serve in. it did not require marshal valor. on the contrary, it required, at least on senator kerry's part, and considerably less so on mine, extraordinary diplomatic skills. the administrations of president reagan and george herbert walker bush, had limited engagement with the government of vietnam for the purpose of encouraging vietnam to provide answers of the face of many americans who were still listed as pow-mia.
that effort was led by a man both john and i respect, former chairman of the joint chiefs, vecsey, who continued as the president's special apple sear to vietnam in president clinton's administration. by the early 1990's, i think both john and i had come to the view that it would be better for our country to have a relationship with vietnam that served our current and future interests than one that continued to nurse the hostilities of our recent tragic past. but we both understood that could never be the case unless we knew american soldiers were not still kept against their will in vietnam and until vietnam fully cooperated in helping us account for americans who didn't return home from the war. to help find answers to their fates, in 1991 then senate majority leader mitchell and minority leader dole had a committee that i appointed as well. members of the committee had conflicting views on the subject of whether or not vietnam still kept american p.o.w.'s. the subject was controversial and provoked the strong passions of many americans, not the least of which were the families of the missing.
most americans who cared about this issue were people of sincere good will and honesty, but there were also a few charlatans and con artists who for whatever reasons had conspiracy theories and implausible scenarios. our public hearings became a circus. behind the scenes, arguments between colleagues became heated and personal as any i have ever experienced. getting information of pow-mias from the intelligence community was fraught with difficulties and getting information from the vietnamese even more so. it wasn't a pleasant experience, to say the least. but through it all, john led the committee with fairness to all sides, with persistence in the pursuit of the truth and with an unshakeable resolve that all members could accept. really, no matter how contentious at a time crazy things got, john eventually got the committee to provide an
answer that would be accepted by most veterans and most if not all, americans who cared so much about the issue. and he did. he got all the members to agree to an exhaustive investigative report that concluded there was no credible evidence that americans did not remain in captivity in vietnam. it was a masterful accomplishment. after that experience, john and i worked together to encourage the clinton administration and the government of vietnam to begin normalizing relations. i witnessed john's diplomatic skills and practice again. his patience, his persistence, his persuasiveness, his tact, and his singular focus on getting the best result possible in negotiations with a diverse array of government officials in both countries, convincing a reluctant administration to make what the president's advisors considered a politically perilous decision and reluctant fellow senators to vote for a resolution recommending normalization.
it was an impressive performance, to say the least. helping to establish a relationship with vietnam that serves american interests and values rather than one that remained mired in mutual resentment and bitterness is one of my proudest accomplishments as a senator, and i expect it's one of john's as well. working toward that end with john and witnessing almost daily his exemplary statesmanship is one of the highest privileges i've had here. should he be confirmed, and i'm confident he will be, and become our next secretary of state, i'm sure we will have our disagreements, which i'm sure neither of us will hesitate to bring to the other's attention, but i know he'll quit himself in that office with distinction and use his many talents and his persistence to advance our country's interests. i commend his nomination to you without reservation. >> wow. you might want to rest your case there, mr. chairman. with our thanks to this distinguished panel, we thank you very much, madam secretary.
thank you, again, to our colleagues. and now we call up chairman kerry. mr. chairman, we welcome you to the other side of the committee and look forward to your testimony and any introductions you may want to make. >> mr. chairman, ranking member corker and members of the committee, thank you very, very much. i'm in awe of the wonderful comments that were just made, and i appreciate them and i'll say a little bit more about
them. before i begin, i'd like to have the privilege of just introducing very quickly -- i think most of you know my wonderful wife, teresa, who has been part of this great journey for a long time, my brother, cam, who is serving over in the commerce department, and i trust they know he's here. my daughter vanessa and her husband, brian, both of whom are working as physicians as mass general in boston. and another daughter, who is not here, alexandra, and three
stepsons who are likewise spread around the world. but we are thinking about them as we embark on this wonderful journey. for 29 years, i've sat up on the dais where you all are and i looked down at the witnesses and wondered what they're thinking sometimes as we question them and i don't want this to affect
your opening questions. but let me say, i've never seen a more distinguished and better looking group of public officials in my life. suddenly, i am feeling a lot of sympathy for the folks who sit down here. i want you to know that a couple nights ago i was watching "godfather 2" so be forewarned if someone suddenly shows up with my long lost brother back in the audience. all bets are off, folks. and i am enormously grateful for the generous comments of the chair and the ranking member. thank you very, very much. thank you, also, for your tremendous cooperation over the course of the last years in providing that you get me out of here quickly. i will be able to congratulate you more fully when you
officially assume your responsibilities. i will tell you all of you on this committee, the new members, particularly, that i have enjoyed chairing this committee and working with you as much as anything that i have done or been privileged to do in all of my career. i think this is one of the great committees of the united states senate, and it is the only major committee that i have served on since day one when i arrived in the senate in 1985. as you know, the committee carries special consequential responsibilities with respect to the security of our nation, and i think each and every one of you for the serious
consideration you give and have given to the challenging issues and for the remarkable cooperation that i have had as chairman of the committee. if confirmed i will be forward to continuing to work particularly closely with all of you as we tackle some of the toughest issues and challenges that i have seen in the entire time i've served on this committee, and i particularly welcome the new members in that regard. i'm very grateful to president obama for nominating me and
entrusting me with this important responsibility, and i am particularly grateful to secretary clinton, senator mccain and senator warren for their introductions of me just now. i will not take it personally that this may be the one item in washington that seems to unite democrats and republicans to get me out of the senate quickly. secretary clinton, particularly, has served above and beyond the call of duty. i think everybody on this committee would agree. her service has been superb and we all thank her for a job well done, for her tireless efforts on behalf of our nation. she has set a very high mark for the stewardship of the state department and her commitment to country. and i can pledge to you that with the consent of the senate, i will do everything in my power, summon all my energy and focus to build on her record and on the president's vision. senator mccain, as he mentioned, is a longtime friend.
we met here in the senate coming from very different political positions and perspectives, but, you know, we found common ground. i will never forget standing with him in hanoi, in the cell which he spent many years of his life listening to him talk about that experience. i will always be grateful for his partnership in helping to make real peace with vietnam by establishing the most significant process in the history of our country or in any country, for the accounting of missing and dead in any war. and then for working to lift the embargo and ultimately normalize relations with an old
enemy. john had every reason to hate, but he didn't and instead we were able to help heal deep wounds and end the war that had divided too many people for much too long. as we talk about war and peace and foreign policy, i want all of us to keep in our minds, as i think we do, the extraordinary men and women in uniform who are on the front lines even as we meet here today, the troops at war who helped protect america. i can pledge to you as a veteran of war, i will always carry the consequences of our decisions in my mind and be grateful that we have such
extraordinary people to back us up. i also thank my new colleague, senator warren, for her generous comments. she's a longtime fierce fighter for what is just and fair. and if her testimony has any affect today and the confirmation -- i spent 29 years. it's humbly to hear before you in this new role as president obama's nominee for secretary of state, but my approach to this role, if confirmed, is also deeply informed by the 28-plus years that i have been privileged to spend in the
senate. that perspective will remain with me, if confirmed, as secretary. thei'm already excited by many ways that we can work together and in which we must work together. in order to advance america's security interests in a complicated and ever more dangerous world. i would add that i'm particularly aware that in many ways the greatest challenge to america's foreign policy will be in your hands, not mine, because while it's often said that we can't be strong at home if we're not strong in the world, if these days of fiscal crisis and as a recovering member of the supercommittee, i am especially cognizant of the fact that we can't be strong in
the world unless we're strong at home. and the first priority of business, which will affect my credibility as a diplomat and our credibility as a nation, as we work to help other countries create order, the first priority will be that america at last puts its own fiscal house in order. i really can't emphasize to you enough how imperative this is. people all over the world are looking to the united states for leadership. we are known as the indispensible nation for good reason. no nation has more opportunity to advance the cause of democracy, no nation is as committed to the cause of human rights as we are. but to protect our nation and make good on our promises, as well as to live up to our ideals and meet the crisis of this moment, it is urgent that we show people and the rest of the
world that we can get our business done in an effectively and timely way. it is difficult enough to solve some of the problems that we face, but i will tell you it becomes impossible or near impossible if we ourselves replace our credibility and leverage with gridlock and dysfunction. i've heard it in my trips and secretary clinton has heard it in her trips and any of you that travel will begin to hear questions about whether or not the united states can or will deliver. moreover, more than ever, foreign policy is economic policy. the world is competing for resources in global markets. every day that goes by where america is uncertain about engaging in that arena or unwilling to put our best foot forward and win, unwilling to demonstrate our resolve to lead is a day in which we weaken our nation itself. my plea is that we can summon across party lines, without partisan diversions and economic patriotism which recognizes that americans' strength and prospects abroad depend on american strengths and results at home. it's hard to tell the leadership of a number of countries that they have to deal with the i.m.f., balance their budget, create economic order where there is none if we don't provide it for ourselves. it's also imperative that in implementing president obama's vision for the world as he ends more than decade of war that we join together to augment our message to the world. president obama and every one of us here knows that american foreign policy is not defined by drones and deployments alone. we cannot allow the extraordinary good that we do to save and change lives, to be eclipsed entirely by the role that we have had to play since september 11, a role that was thrust upon us. american foreign policy is also defined by food security, energy security, humanitarian assistance, the fight against
disease and the push for development as much as it is by every single counterterrorism initiative, and it must be. it is defined by leadership, on life-threatening issues like climate change or fighting to lift up millions of lives by promoting freedom and democracy from africa to the americas or speaking out for the prisoners of gulags in north korea or millions of refugees and displaced persons or victims of human trafficking. it is defined by keeping faith with all that our troops have sacrificed to secure for afghanistan. america lives up to her values when we give voice to the voiceless. i share with the president the conviction that is equally imperative that we assert a new role in the world of increasing failed and failing states. burgeoning populations of young people, hungry for jobs, opportunity, individual rights and freedom are rebelling against years of disenfranchisement and humiliation. the person who started the arab spring wanted to sell his fruit without corruption and abuse. that's what led him to self-
immolate. the youth of terrier square represented a generational thirst for opportunity, not a religious movement. the developed world can do more to meet the challenge and responsibility of these aspirations. with the help of all the members of this committee, i am determined to help president obama meet this moment. it is vital for our nation that we do so. the world is well aware that we face a number of the dangerous challenges, particularly in the middle east and south central asia. given our extraordinary interests in nonproliferation, we must resolve the questions surrounding iran's nuclear program. the president has made it definitive. we will do what we must do to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and i repeat here today, our policy is not containment. it is prevention and the clock
is ticking on our efforts to secure responsible compliance. this administration, working with congress, and an unprecedented international coalition, has put into place crippling sanctions on iran. mr. chairman, you have been a leader in that effort. and i know will continue to be. president obama has stated again and again, and i want to emphasize this. he and i prefer a diplomatic resolution to this challenge, and i will work to give power lines -- diplomacy every effort to succeed, but no one should mistake our resolve to reduce the nuclear threat. nearly 42 years ago chairman fulbright first gave me the opportunity to testify before this committee during a difficult and divided time for our country.
today i can't help but recognize that the world itself then was in approximate many ways simpler -- was in many ways simpler, cold war antagonisms. today's world is more complicated than anything we have experienced. from the emergence of china, to the arab awakening, inextricably linked, environmental, demographic issues, proliferation, poverty, pandemic disease, refugees, conflict ongoing in afghanistan, entire populations and faiths struggling with the demands and the accelerating pace of technological innovation invading all of that, shifting power from nation states to individuals. with the end of the cold war, henry kissinger pointed out in his superb book on diplomacy, he said, none of the most important countries which must build a new world order have had any experience with the multistate system that is emerging. never before has a new world order had to be assembled from so many different perceptions or on so global a scale. nor has any previous order had to combine the attributes of the historic balance of power system with global democratic opinion and the exploding technology of the contemporary period. that was written in 1994, and it may be even more relevant today. so this really is a time for american leadership, a time for
fresh thinking, a time to cross party lines and divide and come together in the interests of our nation, a time to find ways to work together to maximize the impact of all of america's resources, including the great resource of this committee and of the united states senate. if i am confirmed, one of the first things i intend to do is sit down with senator menendez and senator corker and invite all the members of this committee to come together, hopefully at a time where there is no interruption and we can actually dig in and talk and talk about how we can have a constructive dialogue and a collegial relationship. because even as we pride ourselves on the separation of powers and the unique oversight role that the committee plays, the challenges in the world are so enormous that we will do our country a disservice if we didn't identify the ways that we can help each other to confront a unique set of questions globally.
if you confirm me, i would take office as secretary proud that the senate is in my blood but equally proud that so too is the foreign service. my father's work under presidents, both democrat and republican, took me and my siblings around the world for personal journey that brought home the sacrifices and the
commitment the men and women of the foreign service make every day on behalf of america. i wish everyone in the country could see and understand firsthand the devotion, loyalty, amazingly hard and often dangerous work that the diplomats on the front lines do for our nation. theirs is a service which earns our country an enormous return on investment. i will be proud and honored to represent them and i will work hard to augment our public diplomacy so that the story is told at home and abroad. everyone on this committee knows well that the road ahead is tough, but i believe just as deeply that global leadership is a strategic imperative for america. it is not a favor that we do for other countries.
it amplifies our voice. it extends our reach. it is the key to jobs, the fulcrum of our influence. it matters. it really matters to the daily lives of americans. it matters that we get this moment right for america, and it matters that we get it right for the world. one discussion that i particularly look forward to beginning with you, my colleagues, and with our country is about the commitment that we make in our foreign affairs budget. less than 1% of the entire budget of government at a time that the world is getting smaller, that our economy depends on its relationship with every other country in the world, that we face a more global market than anytime in our history. so not just in my briefings at the state department but in my conversations with business
leaders, in my trips to crisis areas, to war zones, to refugee camps and in some of the poorest countries on earth, i have been reminded of the importance of the work that our state department does to protect and advance america's interests and do the job of diplomacy in a dangerous world and particularly i think there is more that can be done to advance our economic capacity and interests. in this debate and in every endeavor, i pledge to work very closely with this committee, mr. chairman and mr. ranking member, not just because it will be my responsibility but because i will not be able to do this job effectively nor will our country get what it needs to out of these initiatives without your involvement and your ideas going forward. so thank you, mr. chairman, and members of the committee. i know there's a lot of ground to cover.
>> the committee will be in order. the committee will be in order. >> i'm tired. [indiscernible] [laughter] >> well, you know, i tell you, mr. chairman, when i first came to washington and testified, i obviously was testifying as part of a group of people who came here to have their voices heard. and that is above all what this place is about. so i respect i think the woman who was voicing her concerns about that part of the world and maybe -- senator mccain, you
were just there. you were in a refugee camp but i know you heard this kind of thing. people measure what we do. in a way that's a good exclamation point to my testimony. so mr. chairman, i know there's a lot of ground to cover, and as a veteran of the committee, i know we do better when we have a good dialogue so i look forward to having that dialogue. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for your very thoughtful presentation. on behalf of the committee, we
welcome teresa and all of the family and we thank you for your commitment as well, because obviously it is a commitment of family as well to the service that senator kerry will provide as secretary of state and there are sacrifices in that so we appreciate it very much. let me start off with a round of questioning. the chair will recognize himself. and let me say that we -- i think we all appreciate and embrace your offer of engagement in the committee. we look forward to that and having come from the senate, i know that we will particularly appreciate your understanding of this institution and its importance of the committee so we really embrace that offer and look forward to that moment.
let me start off with iran. in the last 13 months, congress has passed and the president signed three major sets of sanctions against iran. they have been tremendously effective in reducing iran's oil revenues and at least nominally bringing iran to a negotiating table. however, iran remains defiant and ambitious in its nuclear ambition. it has not slowed its enrichment. the iaea believe they have conducted live test of conventional explosives at a military base to which it denies iaea entry. between may and august of this year, iran has more than doubled the number of centrifuges at its facility which is buried deep in a mountain. iran needs -- a country with peaceful ambitions doesn't enrich uranium at defines of u.n. security council resolutions. it doesn't fail to hide them inside a mountain. and a peaceful nation doesn't breach the international inspections regime compelled by the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. so, mr. secretary, in this respect, senator -- [laughter] >> i thought this could be quick.
>> i have a sense of clairvoyance. in this respect, many of the sanctions are overseen by the department of state in terms of enforcement, and its crucial that that enforcement can bring a verifiable agreement, hopefully with iran. under your leadership, will the department be committed to the full enforcement of the sanctions passed by the congress and to multilateral efforts to ensure the adherence of other nations to these sanctions? >> yes. totally. i might just quickly add. the real has dropped by about 80%. other nations have been extraordinarily cooperative in reducing their dependence on iranian oil. there is a clear indicator the impact these are having. i think the congress deserves credit to put toughest sanctions in history. >> in that respect, as we hope while the president set all options on the table, we hope that the sanctions which will ultimately drive us to a successful conclusion. what would be the basic parameters in the p5-plus-1 effort in terms of enrichment capacity, enriched uranium, the fordo facility, what will you seek as part of any agreement? >> well, we'd seek compliance with the requirements of the iaea and the requirements of the u.n. resolutions that have been passed with respect to it and
compliance with the n.p.t. itself. i'm not going to be totally inappropriate for me here to begin to negotiate with myself and the committee with respect to how they would come into compliance or what would be required. i can tell you this -- it is going to be imperative that they come into full compliance, and there are several ways in which we might be able to get there and most prominently, obviously, the opinion h 5 plus one but the president has made it clear that he's prepared to engage if that's what it takes in bilateral efforts and hopefully there's a negotiation going on right now for the next meeting of the p5-plus-1. i think everybody is very hopeful that we can make some progress on the diplomatic front now. so i simply say, mr. chairman, in a iran continue -- i'd say this to the iranians. i hope they listen. they've continually professed the peacefulness of their program. it is not hard to prove a peaceful program. other nations have done that and do it every day, and it takes intrusive inspections. it takes living up to publicly arrived at standards. everybody understands what they are. the allies in the p5-plus-1 have made it clear, and that includes very powerful entities,
obviously. people who have been supportive of iran in other ways at times -- china, russia. they have made it clear that we are all united in this standard and that we are looking for the full compliance with the n.p.t. so i think the process itself has to flush out the details, but the iranians need to understand there's no other agenda here.
would have the largest civilian mission in the world in afghanistan. can you articulate what you believe the administration's and goals are in afghanistan? what metrics would you use to guide our continued presence? achieving development goals or will the mission be guided by success in counterterrorism? >> the mission is a twofold mission, mr. chairman. it is to turn over responsibility to the afghan forces, for them to be able to assume responsibility for security, which is slated to begin in earnest in the spring. present karzei moved that date up himself and has asked for it to be accelerated. it is the judgment of general allen and others that we are on target to be able to meet a more rapid rate of turnover. that would mean our troops in the near term, sometime this year, will not be in the lead and will not be the ones taking the brunt of any kind of activities, offensive activities. the second purpose is to maintain a capacity to prevent the kind of terrorism which took us there in the first place. there will be a counterterrorism mission that will continue. president obama has been very clear about the fact that the counterterrorism mission will continue beyond 2014. the training will probably continue beyond 2014. there will be some measure of engagement, but the effort is to have the afghans in the lead, continued training of the forces, and an enduring partnership with afghanistan, and support an afghan-led reconciliation if it is possible. obviously, the strategy is to have a sufficient capacity with any ansf that if it is not possible, the government of
afghanistan is still sustained. >> finally, the western hemisphere, 2013 will be a year of great change in the western hemisphere, particularly in latin america. the impending change of leadership in venezuela will have a ripple effect on the political and economic effects. the newly elected president of mexico was talking about refocusing his bilateral relationship, emphasizing economic cooperation. public security questions throughout the region, the desire of the region to engage in more critical agenda. it would be my hope that upon your confirmation, your leadership with consider more strategic level approaches to the region. taking advantage of changing political tides and opportunities to enhance multilateral efforts on counterterrorism, narcotics trafficking, opening up new markets, and a commitment to our democracy programs throughout the region. can you briefly talk to me about your views and a vision as it relates to what i think is a new and momentous opportunity? >> i agree with you, mr. chairman. it is an opportunity that is staring at us and i hope that we can build on what secretary clinton has done. in order to augment our efforts in that region. you've had the initiative working with mexico that has been increased efforts on anti- narcotics, anti-violence. there has been the central
american security initiative. energy initiatives with brazil. and energy climate initiatives. but there have been some out liar states that have not been as much a part or as cooperative. we all know who they are. depending on what happens in venezuela, there may be an opportunity for trenches in there. i would hope that bolivia, ecuador, we could make progress. one of the great stories of latin america is colombia. i remember when working on the western hemisphere subcommittee, there had recently in been an assassination of 13 members of the supreme court in
one room in colombia. the presidential candidates were assassinated. you could not run for office. the president stepped up at a critical moment and began the process of rescuing that nation. president santos now is doing an amazing job. we have created a greater economic relationship bypassing the trade agreement. we have to build on that. that is an example for the rest of latin america as to what awaits them if we can induce people to make a better set of choices. there are some other things that have contributed to the gap between our relationship with some of those other question -- countries. i would do it and the close consultation with you, mr. chairman, and members of the committee.
there are some ways to improve our efforts in latin america. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was touched by your opening comments. i think you have led a life that brought you to this moment. i am happy for you that you will be able to express yourself in this way as secretary of state and for your family. i am thrilled that you are in a position i know you have long for and think you can make a major difference. i as ked you 73 questions in advance. thank you for your diligence. i know it took a lot of time. the president has nominated someone for secretary of defense. we all will meet with him and his hearing will be next week he was part of a group called global 0. for those that care about our nuclear arsenal, some of the things that brought offered in this report are disconcerting. typically, the defense department presses for weaponry and making our country is safe.
the state department presses for nuclear arms agreements and reductions. in the event this person is confirmed, that balance will not be there. you and i spent a lot of time on the treaty. you let me be involved in the ratification. i am wondering if there is something you might say to me in that sees our future in a way with that combination of these two people, something you can say to assure me about our nuclear posture in the future and the role he will play in that regard. >> absolutely. i know chuck hagel. i think he is a strong, patriotic former senator and he will be a strong secretary of defense. i have dealt with him and and number of forays. he has been head of the atlantic council, some of the things and efforts to color senator hagel's approach on some of these things cannot do justice. i am going to come to it.
i think it is important to think about it. when that initiative came out and we began to hear about the people who said let's get no nuclear-weapons, i scratch my head. i said how is that going to work? i find it hard to think how you can get down to a number in today's world. henry kissinger, jim baker, james schlesinger, many others have all agreed with that as a goal for the world. it is an aspiration. we should always be aspirational. but it is not something that can happen in today's world nor could any leader today sit here or in any other chair and promote the notion that we should be cutting down our deterrent levels before inadequate levels to maintain deterrence. the military has strong views about what that is. we have cut down some 1500 now. there is talk of going down to a lower number.
i think it is possible to get their, if you have commensurate levels of inspections, verification, and guarantees about the capacity of your nuclear stockpile program. i know you are deeply invested in that component. we can get to some of that may be later in the hearing. i believe we have to maintain that. i don't think senator hegel is sitting there or will go to the defense department and be a proponent. this is talking about conflict resolution, changes that have to take place the that the society's -- societies. it is worth aspiring to. and we are lucky if we will get there in however many centuries the way we are going. >> i appreciate your opening comments about the issues we face. for a moment i wished you were nominated for secretary of treasury. i do appreciate those comments and the ones you just made. you have been a senator for 29 years. the president was under your
been a shift in policy. the president was here for meetings. my hope is that -- i want to keep the existing efforts going, which could become subject to the sequestration and budget efforts. we will have to convince our colleagues of the 4/10 of these kinds of initiatives taking root and having the route to stay at them until we do get the moral results. mexico has been under siege. everybody knows that. it has been very difficult. a lot of coverage exhibited by military folks in the police. there is an effort to try to move away from the military and into the justice system. that is why we will have to
double our efforts here and make sure we are funding the personnel and program itself. you need the cooperation appeared to get that commitment. >> thank you very much. the new president of mexico stated that his strategy with regards to security cooperation is to achieve a mexico in pe ace. his government would not abandon the fight against organized crime. how will you work to ensure that areas of mutual interest between the two countries if the attention they deserve and how we get that cooperation along the border? that is crucial. they have six border states. we have or. it is crucial that we work with each other.
>> the president is trying to move this in a different direction. this has been a militarized and violent initiative over the last years. i am a former prosecutor. i was the chief administer to prosecutors in middlesex county. i look prosecuting. it was a great job. we created a drug task force that had all kinds of lands of how to proceed to minimize the impact of narcotics on our communities. there is no one approach. you have to be doing everything that you need to do. that means domestically in the united dates you have to do education and treatment. what we have is a revolving circle of demand.
we are the principal demand country. europe is in huge demand. cocaine routes and miramar woods -- marijuana roots are not just coming up from columbia where it has been produced. it is going across the atlantic and out into other countries. it comes from asia and other countries. it is a pandemic. we need a more comprehensive approach, one where it is less finger-pointing and you work to understand everybody's role in trying to do something about it .rie i this label of war on drugs is artificial. war implies it is all out. you have to win. it has never been all out. we have always failed to do our
part with respect to treatment and education and abstinence and so forth. we have to reengage ourselves. that would help us that was credibility and viability with other countries. thank you. >> thank you for coming today for your testimony. i agree with candidate barack obama who said in 2007 that the president does not have the power under the constitution to authorize a military attack. do you agree with candidate barack obama or president barack obama, who took us to war in libya without congressional authority unilaterally? >> i support the war powers act. i believe in congressional authority to go to war.
i argued that on occasion with respect to some things here. there are occasions, which i have supported, where the president of the united eggs has to make a decision immediately and implement that decision immediately. i support ronald reagan when he sent troops into -- grenada. i support george h w bush when he said troops into panama. i supported president clinton when he did what was needed to be done in kosovo and bosnia. in this instance, the president behaved in that tradition. >> the constitution has no exceptions for when you're having a tough time or when people disagree with you and you go ahead and do it. you were early 1970's, critical of the bombing in cambodia. you felt it was not authorized
by congress. has your opinion changed? how is it different than libya? >> boarded my opinion -- nor did my opinion change about vietnam. >> is cambodia different than libya >? >> yes it is different. >> the constitution does not give this kind of latitude to sometimes go to war and sometimes not go to war. barack obama was explicit. people think or he and paul did like anything about barack obama. i like his forthrightness when he said, no president should unilaterally go to war. >> i respect that. you can be absolutist.
it does not work in some instances when 10,000 people are about to be wiped out by a dictator and you need to make a quick judgment about engaging. you cannot rely on a congress that has proven itself unwilling to move after weeks and months. >> do you think a un resolution sufficient to go to war? >> no, i would not say sufficient to go to war. a un resolution is a missionary -- necessary ingredient to provide legal basis for military action in an emergency. it is not sufficient to require the united states to do something. we obey our constitution and our institution and rights. >> you have heard president morsi's comments.
is it wise to send them f-16s? >> those comments are reprehensible. they said that -- they set back the possibilities of working towards neutral interest -- issues of mutual interest. they are unacceptable by anybody's standards. they have to be apologized for. > president morsi issued to statiotements clarify those comments. we had a group of senators who spent a good part of their conversation and heated discussion about it. not everything -- this is always the complication in dealings in
the international sector. not everything went itself to simple clarity, black, white, every time. we have critical interest with each other. egypt has supported and lived by the peace agreement with israel. israel has taken steps to begin the -- to begin to deal with the problem of security & nine. those are vital to us and to the security of israel. they have followed through on the promise to have an election. >> to have had an election. they had a constitutional process. there was another election.
other countries elect somebody that you do not agree with this not give us permission to walk away from their election. >> this has been a problem with our policy for decades. we were in favor of radical jihad because they were the enemy of our enemy. i see support for serious rebels. >> and any of the arms sales that the united states has engaged in that part of the world, there is always a test applied with respect to a qualitative difference in any of those weapons with respect to israel's defensive security. we do not sell and will not sell weapons that may upset that qualitative balance. >> if we sell them to egypt, we
have to give them to israel. why don't we not give weapons to israel's enemies. that would save money and make it safer for israel. >> until we are at that moment where that may be achievable, maybe it would be better to try to make peace. >> would you consider supporting conditioning aid to pakistan on the release of the dr.? if we do not support informants, we will not get many more informants. >> i have talked directly to the president and general about the dr.. like most americans, i find it incomprehensible if not repugnant that somebody who helps to find osama bin laden is in jail in pakistan.
that follows every american. the pakistanis make the argument that he did not know what he was doing. that he did not know who he was physically targeting or what was happening. but do you think he knew he was helping americans? >> he knew what he was doing in that. they also make the argument that he was doing that as a matter of regular business for him. that is no excuse. i am explaining that rather than cut aid, which is a germanic -- a dramatic approach to a relationship that has a lot of interest. we have our ground lines of whic indications that go to at a stan -- afghanistan.
that is critical to our supply of troops. we have intelligence cooperation. our folks were able to cooperate on the ground in pakistan. that is one of the ways we were able to get osama bin laden. i do not think the pakistanis have gotten credit sufficiently for the fact they were helpful. they allow the people to be there. it helped us to tie the knots that focused on next to some degree. they have lost some 6000 people in the last year. in their efforts to go after terrorists, they have of about 30,000 people over the course of the last several years. there are things that the pakistanis have done.
i intend to raise the issue with them. i can promise you that. i am not going to recommend nor do i think it is wise for american policy to just cut our assistance. we need to build our relationship with the pakistanis, not diminish it. >> senator murphy. >> welcome. i am sorry that our careers in ped for only arlape few weeks. it has been your example that has inspired many of us to do so and your ability to position yourself as a spokesman for the this enfranchised.
a lot of us came into public service in part because of your work for our region. i wanted to's and my short time turning to the asia-pacific region. specifically, china as well. secretary clinton crafted a great but simple phrase about how today you can become a global superpower through the power of your economy, not by the power of your military. china is the best example. it has turned its focus to military might. in connecticut, we have what percent of our exports sent to that region today on an annual basis. we are increasing our country's exports by a 30% clip. those numbers pale in comparison to where it they could be. high-tech manufacturers cower at
the prospect of sending pods that will be replicated and sold in counterfeit markets. military manufacturers in connecticut cannot get into china as their competitors get a earshot of -- a fair shot of adding into our market. she talked about the concept of economic statecraft. i wanted to get your thoughts about how we can use and continue to use the power of the department of state to pressure the chinese to correct its flaws and open up its markets to poor american goods -- more americans could. how do you see our ability to exercise economic pressure on that region to be a source of what we hope will be a doubling of exports over the next five years?
>> center, thank you for your nice comments. welcome to the committee. i am to see you and senator mccain on the committee. i am delighted that both of you are there. i am sorry that we will not be working together in the committee. we will be working together. i look for to it. secretary clinton has said, china is an ongoing process. it takes commitment and perseverance to break through on one issue or another. we have a lot of issues with china.
my intention is to continue to focus as the administration has begun. rebalancing to grow that's rebalance. it is critical to strengthen our relationship with china. china is the oth significant economy in the world. it has a voracious appetite for resources around the world. we need to establish rules that work for everybody. that is why the administration came up with the transpacific partnership to help establish greater leverage for this notion of broadly accepted rules of the road, which are critical to our commerce. on international property, currency, market access, there are still significant challenges ahead with china. my hope is that the new
administration will recognize also the need to broaden the relationship with us and return. i could envision a way in which china could play a much more significant role as a partner in any number of efforts overly. we should not be viewed as -- we will be competitors in the economic marketplace. we should not be viewed as adversaries that diminishes our ability to cooperate on a number of things. china is cooperating on us with iran. there is more we can do with north korea. there is more we can do in other parts of the far east. hopefully, we can build those relationships that would further
that transformation. we make progress. it is incremental. it is a tough slide. there is not any single magic way to approach it. if we can find a better sense of majority of our interest and commonality of goals that we can work towards. climate change is an example. if we just sat around where we are today, we will have a problem. china will soon have double the omissions of the united states of america. we have not to get these folks as part of these unified effort. i intend to work hard to do that. >> i appreciate that. the one most important stumbling block to that growing diplomatic partnership that i agree could have potential for the world is
the potential conflict between china's growing military footprint in the region and our pivot to a show when it comes to our military interest. we have seen these territorial disputes between china and the philippines and korea and japan. how do we ramp up military latiy without getting drawn into these disputes? >> i would like to look at that very carefully. i can dig into that deeper. we have a lot more places out there than any other nation in the world, including china. we have a lot more forces in
any other nation in the world, including china. we have all rented the president's -- we have augmented the present announcement in australia additional marines. the chinese say, what is the ?hinese -- us doing > x every action has its reaction. we have to be thoughtful about how we go forward. i want to take on the world pivot. . i'm not turning away from anything else. we are -- whatever we do in ch ina should not, it at the
expense of the relationships of europe or the middle east or elsewhere. we need to try to bring europe with us to a recognition of the opportunities in the far east. it would improve our clout. it would leverage the market. there has been some talks about a u.s.-eu partnership. i do not know if that can become reality. we need to think about not creating a threat where there is not one. understand carefully where we can find the basis of better cooperation. i want someone saying, kerry has a mistaken notion of what china is doing. i am not saying you do not have
to be careful and understand where it is going. i am not talking about retreating from our current levels. i am trying to think about how we do this in a way that does not create the reaction you do not want to create. >> senator mccain. >> your 29 years of service is a great example for those of us newcomers. i thank you for that. in the opening round of russian --assurance, we raised issues about the western hemisphere. i worry that our firm -- our foreign policy has been very oriented east-west. the north-south access is
important. i worry about the chinese being all over the americas. in a time -- we could see our influenzae road. i hope that the state department has that north-south access as they keep focus. your opening comments demonstrated what has long been a position of yours that you understand we have an unbreakable bond with israel. that is why the definitive statement about iranian's nuclear ambitions was heartening to hear. i believe that as difficult as it looks, we long for the day that there would be peace between a secure jewish state of israel and an independent
palestine. it may seem the. the current peaceful relationships and i've learned seemed unlikely.land >> part of my approach to help advance a date is not to be too explicit here today. i have a lot of thoughts about that challenge. one of the things i can guarantee you is that i do not want to prejudice it i public demands to any party at this point in time. president obama is equally committed to a two-state solution. i have been reading speculation
about whether or not he is committed to the process. a lot of it is wrong, blown out of proportion. the president understands the stakes and the implications in the middle east. so much of what we aspire to achieve and what we need to do globally is tied to what can or does not happen with respect to israel and palestine. in someplace is, it is used as an excuse. in others, it is a deeply felt challenges.
i will not say anything that prejudices our ability to try to get to and negotiation moving in the appropriate way. i will not go into what that is. i personally believe -- i have been out -- at this for almost 29 years. i have watched all of it. i was on the lawn when we were there with the handshake. i have been through seven prime minister's, nine and all. two were the same. i have seen madrid, oslo, so forth. we need to try to find a way forward. i believe there is a way forward. if we cannot be successful, the
door to the possibilities of two state solutions could shut on every body. that would be disastrous. this is an enormously important issue. i will never step back to my commitment for the state of israel. i will not step back from my understanding of the plight of palestinians and others who were caught up in the swirl of this. young children, who i have been who have hopes for a future. i would like to see us deliver. >> the state department and secretary play roles in human rights. you were involved in the activity of secretary clinton and others on behalf of the human rights activist in china.
a human rights issue i am concerned about is religious freedom. you and i share a faith background and a commitment to that american principle that all should be able to worship as they please or not without pressure or punishment or preference. whether it is marginalization of muslims in europe or repression of christians in the middle east or anti-semitism anywhere. the u.s. a role to play in the state -- and the state department does in the protection of religious minorities. >> i could not agree more. i am glad you raised that issue. it is a part of who we are. the tolerance in which the united states was founded is one of our greatest attributes. it is interesting. we have gone through our own
turbulence in that. we did not arrive at it national -- naturally. a guy named roger williams, who left massachusetts and traveled through the forest through the winter and came out on a date and called it a providence. it is now providence, rhode island. others went down to new haven, connecticut. they were getting away from religious persecution in our own country. it took us a while to get it right. the list to say, one of the roles of the state department is to help people understand what an essential ingredient tolerance and diversity and pluralism are to the ability of a country to flourish and people to have their rights. that is one of the big challenges we face.
i am sure my advisors at the state department would say, stop their, senator. i will say something additional, which is i have a lot of friends who are muslim who have built relationships with in my travels. leaders in that region will be the first to tell you that what you see in radical islam is not islam. it is radical islam. it is an exploitation and hijacking of an old and honored religion. we need to find a way -- this is something we have to work at -- for people to understand the degree to which that is happening and becoming an excuse for their disenfranchisement. for being deprived of good governance, good economy, jobs,
opportunity. one of our missions is to not let that be an excuse. carrying the banner of religious tolerance, diversity is critical. we have raised that with resident morsi -- president .orsi we talked about the need for the brotherhood to be able to respect the diversity of egypt. that has not happened completely as much as we would like in the constitutional process. we need to work together to try to do it. you raised a central issue with respect to what is happenioticss in the world. it has to be front and center in our dialogue. >> thank you.
mr. chairman, all of us who have known you thought that you had for president yourself well. you will be confirmed in the next few days. i thank you for your -- for the fact that you want to serve in this position and that you have developed in extensive apparat and understanding. you will be good in this job. thank you for the patients today. having gone through the lengthy hearing on the administrative review boards for recommendations and what happened in benghazi, can we be in short that you will personally oversee the equitation of that being a top
priority. >> absolutely. >> to suggest that spring break is a warm-up -- form of torture -- they are experts about torture. oversight thousand -- over 6000 peaceful democracy advocates were detained or arrested. this past sunday, a group of women who trust in white and march every sunday to church, tried to come together to go to church this sunday. the result of that -- these are
individuals who are the relatives of former our current political prisoners in castro's jails. more than 35 of the women in white were intercepted, beaten with else, threatened to death by agents aiming guns at them and temporarily arrested. we have a u.s. citizen who tried to get access to the internet to a small jewish population in havana and has been languishing in jail for nearly four years. that is real torture. mr. chairman, you have given an incredibly thoughtful, extensive, passionate, and depth of knowledge for nearly three hours and 50 minutes. it is a testament to your long service and what we can expect
of you as the next secretary of state. your father, richard, who also served this country would be proud of you today. committee will receive questions for the record until the close of business today. we urge members to do so by the close of this is today. we encourage the nominee and department to reply to the questions asked expeditiously as possible. this is a chart. -- this is entered. -- this is adjourned.
capacity magazines. here is part of that news briefing with california senator dianne feinstein. you can watch this briefing in its entirety at c-span.org. >>my colleagues and i are introducing a bill to prohibit the sale transfer manufacture and importation of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition devices that can accept more than 10 rounds. let me briefly describe the legislation we are introducing. we prohibit 158 specifically named military style firearms. since the 1994 law expired, there has been an influx of new models of assault weapons. these models are more powerful, more lethal, and more technologically advanced than the weapons were in it 93.
our bill also prohibits other semi automatic rifles, handguns, and shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic. one criticism of the 1994 law was that it was a two- characteristic test. that was too easy to work around. any such wars could remove one of the characteristics and the firearm was legal. the bill we are introducing today will make it much more difficult to work around by moving a one characteristic test. the bill also provides an prohibit specific loopholes such as the slide iron stock, which can be added to and jr 15 -- ar
15, which makes it mimics automatic weapons. some whole stocks and bullet buttons are modifications that make it easy for a new actress to evade the law. the bill prohibits semi automatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 bullets. -- 10 rounds. a ban on importation of assault weapons and large capacity magazines, elimination of the 10 year sunset. let me tell you what the bill will not do -- it will not affect hunting or sporting firearms. the bill protects hunters and sportsmen by protecting 2200 specifically named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes. they are by make and model
exempted from the legislation. when we did this bill in 1993, there were 375. today, there are 2200. finally, the bill subjects grandfathered weapons to a background check in the event the weapon is sold or transferred. we have tried to learn from the bill. we have tried to recognize legal hunting rights. we have tried to recognize legal defense rights. we have tried to recognize the right of a citizen to legally possess a weapon. no weapon is taken from anyone. the purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. therefore, there is no sunset on this bill. >> defense secretary leon panetta announced that the
pentagon is ending the ban on women serving in combat. that is next on c-span. then, remarks from bobby jindal at the republican national committee last night. washingtonning's journal, we talk with bill kristol of the weekly standard. washington journal starts at 7:00 east anern. the emancipation proclamation was issued 150 years ago. today, a discussion on race and president obama's term. hosted by the new america foundation and the washington monthly magazine. live coverage is at 10:00 a.m. eastern. later, live coverage of the republican national committee winter meeting. our coverage begins at 1:00 pm eastern.
>> one of the key themes for any exhibition on the civil war is abolition and emancipation. we are fortunate that those men came of age when they did. they make issues around the emancipation and abolition issues around human rights and american freedom on a general non-race specific level. i will go through every piece of information that johnson was in this paper -- picture. if you pay attention to the top half as well as the bottom half, you will get a dark skinned black woman holding a white child. there is a ladder and a bolt of fabric coming out the other window. there is a rooster appear. roosters have a habit in the
evening of finding a perch and call into the hands to spend the night with him. the hen is on top of the slate orders. if you add all of the inns and outs and look down here at the white girl answering the backyard -- entering the back yard, some of you have said she is coming to hear the music, she is the mistress. she is not here to see the music. no one is paying attention to her. is she a product of one of those liaisons? >> the civil war and its influence on american artist. part of american history tv on c-span three. >>personal-finance starts with sylvia porter. it is a spinoff of the self health is this in the 1930's. they are known from the hard economic times.
you see everything from alcoholics anonymous developed to napoleon health and how to get rich and various social activist movements. fascism and communism have a huge appeal. personal-finance was developed over a amount of years. her goal is to educate people again so the rigid pressure will not occur again. it is an idea we can teach people certain skills. if they learn, we will be ok. >> the dark side of the personal-finance industry saturday night at 10:00. look for more book tv online. like us on facebook. >>the defense department is lifting the ban on women serving in combat. we will hear from defense secretary leon panetta and joint dempsey.f staff leon didn't
>> good afternoon. one of my priorities as secretary of defense has been to remove as many barriers as possible for talented and qualified people to be able to serve this country in uniform. our nation was built on the premise of this citizen soldier. in our democracy, i believe is the responsibility of every citizen to protect the nation, and every citizen who can meet the qualifications of service should have that opportunity. to that end, i have been working closely with general dempsey and the joint chiefs of staff, who have been working for well over a year to examine how
can we expand the opportunities for women in the armed services. it is clear to all of us that women are contradicting in unprecedented ways to the military's mission of defending the nation. women represent 15% of the force, over 200,000. they are serving in a growing number of critical roles on and off the battlefield. the fact is that they have become an integral part of our ability to fulfill the mission. for more than a decade of war, they have demonstrated courage and skill and patriotism. 152 women in uniform have died serving this nation in iraq and
afghanistan. female service members have faced the reality of combat, proven their willingness to fight, and yes, to die to defend their fellow americans. however, many military positions, particularly in ground combat units, still remain closed to women because of the 1994 direct ground combat definition an assignment rule. military and civilian leaders have been taking a hard look at that rule, based on the experiences of the last decade. in early 2012, i announced a series of modifications to that rule, which open up more than
14,000 positions to women, including positions that were located with ground combat units, certain positions with ground combat units below battalion level. these changes have been implemented, and the experience has been very positive. anytime i have visited the war zone, every time i have met with troops and reviewed military operations and talk to wounded warriors, i have been impressed with the fact that everyone, at men and women alike, it is committed to doing the job. they are fighting and dying together. the time has come for our policies to recognize that reality.
the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and i believe there must be service opportunities for women as fully as possible. therefore today, general dempsey and i are pleased to announce we are limiting the direct ground -- we are eliminating the direct ground combat exclusion rules for women, and we are moving forward with the plan to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service. in a few moments after we speak, we will both signed a memo that will rescind the '94 barrier. our purpose is to be ensure that the mission is carried out by the best qualified and most capable service members, regardless of gender and
regardless of creed and beliefs. if members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job -- let me be clear, i am not talking about reducing the qualifications for the job -- if they can meet the qualifications for the job, they should have the right to serve regardless of creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation. having conducted an extensive review, the joint chiefs of staff has developed a very thoughtful approach to integrating women into occupations across the force. i strongly agree with the guiding principles and the specific milestones that they have proposed. we are all committed to implementing this change without compromising readiness or morale or our war fighting capabilities. positions will be open to women
following service reviews, using the joint chiefs vetting principles and following congressional notification procedures established by law. for this change in policy to succeed, it must be done in a responsible, measured, coherent way. i will let general dempsey describe our plan of action in greater detail, but the bottom line is that further integration of women will occur expeditiously, even as we recognize the need to take time to institutionalize changes of this importance. the steps we are announcing today are significant, and in many ways they are an affirmation of where we have been heading for more than 10 years. nevertheless, it will take more than leadership and
professionalism to effectively implement these changes. i am confident by our ability to do that. because i am confident in the leadership that general dempsey and the joint chiefs of staff have demonstrated throughout this process. this has truly been a team effort. i deeply admire the extremely thorough and considered approach that they have taken. i want to express my deepest thanks to marty dempsey for his leadership and all the service chiefs who have been working on this issue and as a group came forward with the recommendation we are implementing today. our men and women in uniform do not ask for more of their leaders in uniform. i fundamentally believe that